Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About whittaker007

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

263 profile views
  1. Looks great, the lighting really sells it!
  2. That looks amazing! What are you planning to do with it? Play the trench run scenario virtually? 3D print it physically?
  3. It could certainly be done. You could Tinkercad (https://www.tinkercad.com) to load the original model (https://www.thingiverse.com/thing:2810454), hollow it out and add entry and exit holes using negative shapes, then add some internal shapes for the dice to bounce off of and away you go. I reckon maybe using the version of the model which has each segment as a separate piece to make it easier to work with and glue it together at the end. You could maybe make some pegs and holes at the corners of the sections to allow them to be push-fit together without glue. If you're asking if I could do it, I probably could, but I'm not short of projects at the moment
  4. I've been experimenting with 3D printed towers too. Most of the x-wing ones I found on Thingiverse didn't look quite right, but I found a huge one someone made for Legion and modified it so the turret could rotate. Here's a shot with one at 50%, 2 at 33% and one at 25% scale. While the 50% scale one is probably the most realistic size, the 33% scale ones seem to be the most practical for the tabletop. I also made another base which is just the bottom part of the tower scaled to fit the turret, taking out the 2 middle sections for a low-profile turret rather than a tower.
  5. My thoughts on a TLT fix would be to make it a gunner-like effect where you can make a second attack if the first one fails to hit. Or if that’s too much of a nerf, just add the “You cannot perform another attack this round” clause.
  6. I guess the last point I would like to raise is that FFG put out many of the ship titles as fixes because they couldn’t fix the ships directly. We don’t have those constraints. It’s highly unlikely that someone would field a Tie Defender without one of the titles, but that really constrains them. It would be great if their base points cost was appropriate in the first place and change the cost of the titles instead. I would love to fly Defenders with decent cannons even if I can’t use the TIE-D title. It also means we could fix the base cost of the Jumpmaster without the hacky fixes FFG have made. We could get to a point where we have a fairly costed ship with appropriate upgrade slots and make FFG’s errata’d fixes into a title that reduces the cost. We should look at our own titles with this philosophy: as a way to specialise a ship, rather than as a fix for points cost. Fix the points cost in the ship itself and add optional titles to suit a particular loadout.
  7. Sorry I rambled a bit above and didn’t really make a concise point. Let me have another go: I think the approach you are taking to re-balance all ships to bring them up to the same meta-competitive level is the right one. However if you make the starting points cost based off the ships as they stand without assuming the upgrade titles will be added is useful as a starting point. One reason is that it provides a simple entry point for new users and helps open it up to a wider audience of casual players and newbies. Another reason is that lowering the base cost of a ship without an upgrade title makes a ship better able to fill a role as a cheap filler or blocker or upgrade carrier, making it still useful in a competitive meta where you have other ships to make up for the deficiencies of the ship compared to others. I also concede that it’s probably not as simple as I’m trying to make out. There are considerations that need to be made for not wanting powerful abilities to be attached to the cheapest possible frame. For example we maybe don’t want to make Biggs any cheaper than necessary and you’d want to be careful with spamming cheap turrets. But that should be able to be addresed by the pilot tiers and upgrade points cost. So maybe in some cases you might want to increase the base cost of tier one pilots and lower the cost of the title. And in some cases maybe you still want to have a base cost for a ship that is higher than the raw stats suggest. TLT (and other upgrade) abuse is best addressed by fixing the upgrade itself rather than the ship. And I see nothing wrong with tweaking ships and pilots directly in some cases without adding cards - giving Horton an EPT and increasing the HWK base attack to 2 for example.
  8. I totally agree that there are several no-brainer fixes needed for some cards and abilities. And I definitely think you are on the right track here. I do think that new titles adding new abilities are the right way to bring old ships up to current meta standards, and some nerfing of cards that are too efficient is also required to bring balance to the force. But there is also something to be said for having a viable option for rebalancing without adding these things. This is especially true for the casual space where we want to be able to attract new players with a low barrier of entry but still give somewhat balanced play options no matter where their personal taste in ships lies. A simple recalibration of cost without titles increases the design space, and keeping all those titles with appropriate costs means having your cake and eating it. Sure, lowly tie fighters can’t push damage through to arc dodging aces, but they might be used in a scenario, or in something like Arturi Cluster, or a casual match. But you could also do something like a mini-swarm paired with a Decimator or something to make up for their deficiencies in a competitive match too. That doesn’t mean that everything has to be totally baseline FFG with a points calibration. Some fixes are necessary and need to be fixed regardless. Not even a filthy casual like me wants to fly a HWK with a 1 die attack
  9. I have to admit that I tend to agree with this sentiment of keeping things simple and lowering the point cost of base ships to compensate. A squad unit limit is a decent solution for cheap ship proliferation. And you could keep all the cool new titles, just put a points cost on them.
  10. Thanks for the advice guys. I've just got the first 6 of the Hobbit and Fellowship expansions, along with Road to Rivendell and The Long Dark from Darrowdelf which were the only packs I could find in stock at the time. The Watcher in the Water, Foundations of Stone and Shadow and Flame briefly came in stock at the online retailer I use, and Watcher has been dispatched, but the other 2 are still waiting. I reckon those orders will be cancelled when they are found not to be in stock after all. I've already had one order of Shadow cancelled in that way. I want to expand the card pool in stages, preferably in order, though I've already added the player cards from Khazad and HoN base sets. So I reckon we will start on the Hobbit and then move on to Khazad-dum which should have some good Dwarf synergies. I don't mind skipping Mirkwood if I can get a mostly complete set of Darrowdelf.
  11. Bummer. I'm in a weird situation where I picked up a second hand lot including the core set, Khazad-dum, everything from Heirs of Numinor up to half the Dream-Chaser cycle and a couple of random Saga expansions. Of course there's more than enough of a card pool there to work with, but it's difficult to get started when all the guides and deck lists out there assume you start at the beginning and get everything incrementally in order. Also Darrowdelf seems to be highly regarded in terms of both the quality of the quests and player cards. In the meantime I've ordered a second core set, and Hobbit and Fellowship expansions, so hopefully by the time we've done with those, Darrowdelf and Mirkwood might be back in print. Otherwise it's kind of sad that I've got so much, yet feel like I'm missing out :/
  12. OK, found https://www.fantasyflightgames.com/en/upcoming/ and see most of the old stuff is currently at the printers.
  13. Any way to find out when the first 2 cycles are going to be reprinted - assuming they will eventually?
  14. Yeah, pretty sure it is. If not there is still stock in a number of online retailers. In the last few months I've bought it and both expansions. A long game, difficult to master and hard to get to the table, but definitely worth your time. There's really no epic space-opera strategy game quite like it. I strongly recommend the Shattered Empire expansion which has much better balanced strategy cards that improves the game no end. Other than that it and the other expansion add more stuff - more plastic pieces, more planets, more races, more planets, more political and action cards, and some optional variants that increase variety. All good stuff, but not really necessary. If you just go with the base game I suggest making your own strategy cards based on those in Shattered Empires.
  15. Hey Biff, that's a very impressive table shot! Where did you get or how did you make the trench mat and turrets?
  • Create New...